PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
Wuling Motors Holdings Limited (0305.HK)
0.690.03 (-4.17%)
0.68 - 0.75
0.33 - 0.86
18.36M / 4.66M (Avg.)
34.50 | 0.02
Steady, sustainable growth is a hallmark of high-quality businesses. Value investors watch these metrics to confirm that the company's fundamental performance aligns with—or outpaces—its current market valuation.
-13.40%
Negative revenue growth while 0259.HK stands at 13.41%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-37.16%
Negative gross profit growth while 0259.HK is at 20.75%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-160.18%
Negative EBIT growth while 0259.HK is at 16.49%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-160.18%
Negative operating income growth while 0259.HK is at 23.24%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-2470.86%
Negative net income growth while 0259.HK stands at 105.62%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-2340.00%
Negative EPS growth while 0259.HK is at 106.67%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-2611.11%
Negative diluted EPS growth while 0259.HK is at 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
8.64%
Slight or no buybacks while 0259.HK is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
-0.01%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
-3.94%
Dividend reduction while 0259.HK stands at 152.03%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
6.72%
OCF growth under 50% of 0259.HK's 179.80%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
8.02%
FCF growth under 50% of 0259.HK's 627.57%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
-50.96%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while 0259.HK stands at 105.97%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-59.12%
Negative 5Y CAGR while 0259.HK stands at 46.70%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-37.20%
Negative 3Y CAGR while 0259.HK stands at 65.85%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
-369.96%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while 0259.HK stands at 234.64%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
8.30%
Below 50% of 0259.HK's 16069.55%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
36.01%
3Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x 0259.HK's 31.51%. Bruce Berkowitz might see if strategic cost controls or product mix drove recent gains.
-175.70%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while 0259.HK is at 566.08%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-159.50%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while 0259.HK is 301.40%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-1528.07%
Negative 3Y CAGR while 0259.HK is 380.18%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
63.91%
10Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x 0259.HK's 43.99%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strong ROE or conservative payout policy fosters faster book value growth.
-16.92%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while 0259.HK is at 49.51%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-22.64%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while 0259.HK is at 38.92%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
64.08%
10Y dividend/share CAGR at 50-75% of 0259.HK's 100.00%. Martin Whitman suspects the firm lags in returning cash to shareholders over the decade.
-75.82%
Both lowered dividends mid-term. Martin Whitman might suspect broad sector constraints or strategic shifts from dividends.
-33.71%
Both firms reduced dividends recently. Martin Whitman suspects broader macro or industry issues forcing cost and payout cuts.
1.80%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. 0259.HK's 10.01%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
-26.93%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
11.24%
Positive asset growth while 0259.HK is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
-11.94%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
77.55%
We have some new debt while 0259.HK reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
-34.23%
Our R&D shrinks while 0259.HK invests at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-10.18%
We cut SG&A while 0259.HK invests at 19.06%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.